news details |
|
|
| Treat petitioner as lecturer since 1991: DB to Govt | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Nov 24: In a LPA filed by Jatinder Pal Singh against the dismissal order of writ Court whereby petitioner seeking directions to the official respondents to promote him substantively to the post of Lecturer with effect from 09/01/1991, a Division Bench of state High Court comprising Chief Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur set-aside the judgment of writ court and directed state respondents to treat the appellant as Lecturer from 09.01.1991 and pay consequential benefits. This order is directed to be implemented by the official respondents within two months.
Division Bench observed that the case of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that he is a permanent resident of Jammu and Kashmir State and a citizen of India and was appointed as Teacher on adhoc basis on 12.08.1987 and continued as such till 1989. On 03.05.1989, he was appointed as Teacher on substantive basis on the basis of recommendations made by the Jammu and Kashmir Service Selection Board. He was promoted as In-charge Lecturer by the Government considering his Post Graduation qualification by Government Order No.33(Edu) of 1991 dated 09.01.1991 and posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Leh. He was ordered to get charge allowance and According to appellant, the posts of Lecturers have to be filled up 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion as per the Jammu and Kashmir Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1992.
Court further observed that Respondent No.3 did his Post Graduation in Physics after grant of in-charge promotion to the appellant. Respondent No.4 was also appointed as In-charge Lecturer on 27.04.1994 as he did his Post Graduation in the year 1991. Respondent Nos.5 to 10 also did their Post Graduation in the years 1992, 1993, 1991, 1991, 1991 and 1992 respectively while Respondent Nos.4 to 9 were promoted as In-charge Lecturers long after the appellant was made as In-charge Lecturer. Respondent No.10 was promoted as Lecturer on 31.08.1999, however, with retrospective effect from 17.09.1992. According to the appellant, none of the respondent Nos.3 to 10 were eligible for promotion on the post of Lecturer as they were not possessing the required minimum qualification when the appellant was appointed as In-charge Lecturer on 09.01.1991. However, the respondents were given retrospective promotion with effect from the date when they were put as In-charge Lecturers and the appellant was given regular promotion as Lecturer only from 12.04.1993 on the alleged ground that he was not having the required experience as teacher for being promoted as Lecturer. The appellant was admittedly appointed as Teacher in the year 1987 which demonstrates that he was having more than three years of teaching experience when he was made as In-charge Lecturer.
He challenged the said action of official respondents in the writ petition and the learned Single Judge rejected the contentions of the appellant by relying upon the service rules and dismissed the writ petition. --(JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
